Why the study?
Does serum cystatin C improve the detection of early renal impairment compared to serum creatinine in patients with type 2 diabetes?
Does serum cystatin C improve the detection of early renal impairment compared to serum creatinine in patients with type 2 diabetes?
Serum cystatin C is superior to serum creatinine and creatinine clearance for detecting early impaired glomerular filtration rate in patients with type 2 diabetes.
May aid earlier renal impairment detection in type 2 diabetes; leaves open need for prospective outcome trials before routine adoption.
The ability to assess renal function in diabetes patients rapidly and early is of major importance. This study was designed to determine whether cystatin C can replace serum creatinine as the screening marker for reduced glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in type 2 diabetes patients. The study was performed on 51 type 2 diabetic patients. GFR was estimated by the plasma clearance of (99m)Tc-DTPA. The correlation between (99m)Tc-DTPA clearance and levels of serum cystatin C, serum creatinine, and creatinine clearance was determined. Sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of renal impairment (defined as GFR<68 ml/min) were calculated by a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for serum cystatin C, serum creatinine, and creatinine clearance. The correlation coefficients with (99m)Tc-DTPA clearance were -0.744 for serum cystatin C, -0.658 for serum creatinine, and +0.625 for creatinine clearance (P<0.001). With a cutoff value of 68 mL/min, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.891 for cystatin C, 0.77 for creatinine, and 0.753 for creatinine clearance. The AUC was statistically different between serum cystatin C and creatinine clearance (P<0.05). The ROC plot indicates that cystatin C is superior to serum creatinine and creatinine clearance for detecting impaired GFR. Serum cystatin C appropriately reflects GFR in diabetes, and is more efficacious than serum creatinine and creatinine clearance in detecting reduced GFR in type 2 diabetes patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xia et al. (2004) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: